Reimagining Cannabidiol Delivery Through Carbon Nanodots.

Ibrahim I.; Lawrence K.; Forte O.; Naidu N.; Huitt L.; Ajibola N.; Xu J.; Boakai R.; Mengu M.; Akabanda F. et al. · Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026

**Background & Methods** This is a narrative review article that systematically searched PubMed and targeted publisher websites to evaluate whether existing literature supports a specific advantage of using carbon nanodots (CNDs) as delivery carriers for cannabidiol (CBD). Evidence was classified into three categories: direct CBD-CND evidence, indirect CND-platform evidence, and indirect CBD-nanoformulation evidence. **Key Findings** - No direct clinical or preclinical studies were identified that simultaneously characterized CBD loading onto CNDs, demonstrated drug release kinetics, measured pharmacokinetics, assessed safety, or established therapeutic efficacy in any model system. - CNDs demonstrate tunable surface chemistry and photoluminescence properties that theoretically support drug delivery applications, and evidence confirms CNDs can successfully carry other pharmaceutical cargos; however, this represents indirect platform support rather than CBD-specific validation. - Existing alternative delivery systems (lipid-based, polymeric, micellar, and transdermal formulations) have demonstrated improvements in selected CBD formulation properties and preclinical endpoints, providing indirect comparators but not direct evidence that CNDs offer superior advantages. **Dosage & Administration** Not reported. This review did not identify any studies providing specific dosing regimens, administration routes, or pharmacokinetic data for CBD-CND systems. **Safety & Adverse Effects** Not reported. No safety data, adverse effect profiles, or toxicological assessments specific to CBD-CND delivery systems were identified in the literature reviewed. **Evidence Quality** This review represents low-level evidence (narrative review without direct experimental validation). Major limitations include: (1) complete absence of direct CBD-CND studies precluding definitive conclusions about the platform's utility; (2) reliance on indirect evidence from unrelated drug-CND systems and non-CND CBD formulations, which cannot establish CBD-CND-specific benefits; (3) separation of demonstrated evidence from theoretical applications, highlighting substantial gaps between proposed mechanisms and validated outcomes. The authors clearly delineate that improved solubility, targeting capability, reduced toxicity, enhanced bioavailability, and therapeutic synergy remain unproven hypotheses rather than established facts. The review identifies critical research gaps, including needs for analytical characterization studies, comparative efficacy assessments, pharmacokinetic and biodistribution evaluations, and comprehensive toxicological profiling before CBD-CND systems can be clinically validated.

More recent cannabis research